There's at least one carrying the "O'Neill Variety" signature who is DF27+ in the Ireland project. This is: 179484 (McCain), he is a GD of 6 @67 markers from Neal (68848), who the Ireland project had sponsored for Z196 (came back Z196-)

When I mentioned about an NPE it's to do with idea that the Ó Néill family genealogy in the 12th century has bee contested for awhile. They had basically been deposed from the Kingship and suffer heavily losses in Battle. They then spent 140 years in the "wilderness" without access to Kingship of Northern Uí Néill. Some genealogists have historically challenged the number of generations reported for the Ó Néill main lineage during this period.

In this case the Uí Néill were a large dynastical grouping claiming desent from "Niall Noígíallach" (Niall na Naoi nGiallach) eg. Niall of the Nine Hostages. The Uí Néill had two main dynastical branches these been the Northern and Southern Uí Néill. Each of which were divided into multiple kindreds (Cineál / O.Irish=cenél).

In the case of the Northern Uí Néill the two main kindres were the Cenél Chonaill (of Tír Chonaill eg. Donegal) and the Cenél nEoghain (of Tír Eoghain eg. Tyrone).

Anyways the Ó Néill family/surname are of the Cenél nEoghain, they are named after "Niall Glúndubh mac Aodha", king of Ireland 916-919AD. His grandson was Domnall ua Néill (ua = Old/middle Irish for Ó), the first to bear the surname.

Traditionally the Uí Néill had held the "high kingship" in period before the 11th century. The operated on a system of rotation. The kingship would rotate between North and South on each succession eg."Northern King" -> "Southern King" -> "Northern King" -> "Southern King" etc.

Originally you would have probably also see "rotation" within the dynasties as to which kindred held the kingship. However by later period in the North anyways the Cenél nEoghain had excluded the Cenél Chonaill form the kingship of Aileach (An Tuasiceart eg. The North).

There's at least one carrying the "O'Neill Variety" signature who is DF27+ in the Ireland project. This is: 179484 (McCain), he is a GD of 6 @67 markers from Neal (68848), who the Ireland project had sponsored for Z196 (came back Z196-)

When I mentioned about an NPE it's to do with idea that the Ó Néill family genealogy in the 12th century has bee contested for awhile. They had basically been deposed from the Kingship and suffer heavily losses in Battle. They then spent 140 years in the "wilderness" without access to Kingship of Northern Uí Néill. Some genealogists have historically challenged the number of generations reported for the Ó Néill main lineage during this period.

In this case the Uí Néill were a large dynastical grouping claiming desent from "Niall Noígíallach" (Niall na Naoi nGiallach) eg. Niall of the Nine Hostages. The Uí Néill had two main dynastical branches these been the Northern and Southern Uí Néill. Each of which were divided into multiple kindreds (Cineál / O.Irish=cenél).

In the case of the Northern Uí Néill the two main kindres were the Cenél Chonaill (of Tír Chonaill eg. Donegal) and the Cenél nEoghain (of Tír Eoghain eg. Tyrone).

Anyways the Ó Néill family/surname are of the Cenél nEoghain, they are named after "Niall Glúndubh mac Aodha", king of Ireland 916-919AD. His grandson was Domnall ua Néill (ua = Old/middle Irish for Ó), the first to bear the surname.

Traditionally the Uí Néill had held the "high kingship" in period before the 11th century. The operated on a system of rotation. The kingship would rotate between North and South on each succession eg."Northern King" -> "Southern King" -> "Northern King" -> "Southern King" etc.

Originally you would have probably also see "rotation" within the dynasties as to which kindred held the kingship. However by later period in the North anyways the Cenél nEoghain had excluded the Cenél Chonaill form the kingship of Aileach (An Tuasiceart eg. The North).

How common is DF27 in Ireland and do you know if it is associated with any other old Irish clans?

The P312* (L21-/U152-) in the study ranges from 4.2% to 7.9%. Good probability that a chunk of this is DF27+ or to other new P312 subclades.

As is evident Ireland is dominated by R1b subclades of L11, on order of 86.6-89.2% of those sampled. L21 obviously been most dominate in that regards. Still it would be nicer if they used larger sample sizes (on order of 200-500 per group).

There's at least one carrying the "O'Neill Variety" signature who is DF27+ in the Ireland project. This is: 179484 (McCain), he is a GD of 6 @67 markers from Neal (68848), who the Ireland project had sponsored for Z196 (came back Z196-)

When I mentioned about an NPE it's to do with idea that the Ó Néill family genealogy in the 12th century has bee contested for awhile. They had basically been deposed from the Kingship and suffer heavily losses in Battle. They then spent 140 years in the "wilderness" without access to Kingship of Northern Uí Néill. Some genealogists have historically challenged the number of generations reported for the Ó Néill main lineage during this period.

In this case the Uí Néill were a large dynastical grouping claiming desent from "Niall Noígíallach" (Niall na Naoi nGiallach) eg. Niall of the Nine Hostages. The Uí Néill had two main dynastical branches these been the Northern and Southern Uí Néill. Each of which were divided into multiple kindreds (Cineál / O.Irish=cenél).

In the case of the Northern Uí Néill the two main kindres were the Cenél Chonaill (of Tír Chonaill eg. Donegal) and the Cenél nEoghain (of Tír Eoghain eg. Tyrone).

Anyways the Ó Néill family/surname are of the Cenél nEoghain, they are named after "Niall Glúndubh mac Aodha", king of Ireland 916-919AD. His grandson was Domnall ua Néill (ua = Old/middle Irish for Ó), the first to bear the surname.

Traditionally the Uí Néill had held the "high kingship" in period before the 11th century. The operated on a system of rotation. The kingship would rotate between North and South on each succession eg."Northern King" -> "Southern King" -> "Northern King" -> "Southern King" etc.

Originally you would have probably also see "rotation" within the dynasties as to which kindred held the kingship. However by later period in the North anyways the Cenél nEoghain had excluded the Cenél Chonaill form the kingship of Aileach (An Tuasiceart eg. The North).

How common is DF27 in Ireland and do you know if it is associated with any other old Irish clans?

Thanks. This news could be relevant for the DF27* (Z195-, Z196-, L617-, Z225-, Z229-, L194- and L1232-) cluster named 'Rox2'. There do not seem to be too many Z196 negative DF27 clusters about yet and now 'O'Neill Variety' looks like it could be one. Similarities between DF27+/Z196- STR clusters might point to shared SNPs downstream of DF27.

I mentioned on here last July that there are a few STR similarities between some of the key off-modal markers for Rox2 and some of the O'Neill Variety in the 1-67 panels. They mis-match on others, however. There are now a couple of 111 marker 'O'Neill Variety' haplotypes on the FTDNA O'Neill project.

Fourteen Rox2 now have 111 marker tests that I know of and there are five extra key off-modal markers in the 68-111 panels. 111 markers makes a DF27 Rox2 match unambiguous.

One of the two 111 marker O'Neill Variety haplotypes matches just one of these five Rox2 key markers in the 68-111 panel, that being 532=14. The other off-modal markers do not match, so the similarity between the two clades now appears less close than an early estimate using Ken Nordtvedt's Generations7 suggested, Generations7 used only 67 marker haplotypes.

Anyway, one interesting thing is that both might share an as yet unknown SNP downstream of DF27, possibly from a common ancestor back in the 1st millennium BC. The two clades of course need to belong to the same DF27 subclade for MRCA estimates. More 111 marker results in the future should produce better MRCA estimates too. There seems no close connection between Rox2 and O'Neill Variety other than a potential shared DF27+/Z196- distant common ancestor. Hopefully things will become clearer with more testing in the future.

Based on the results from the Ireland Y-dna project, most of the DF27 in Ireland seems to be of British extraction.

However, notice that despite the samplings of P312 unknown are all around 7%, the south Ireland and west Ireland sample appear to be highest. Further away from the areas that would be typical of British settlement.

Based on the results from the Ireland Y-dna project, most of the DF27 in Ireland seems to be of British extraction.

However, notice that despite the samplings of P312 unknown are all around 7%, the south Ireland and west Ireland sample appear to be highest. Further away from the areas that would be typical of British settlement.

Thats true and there is a bit of P312, L21- people in the project too. However the extent of British/Protestant settlement in Ireland was rather substantial, more so than just the Ulster area.

I should point out though that due to large migration of "Scots-Irish" in the 18th century that they have a disproportionate percentage among the diaspora community in the modern US compared to what you could class as "Native Irish" who only started emigrating in mass to US from 1820's onwards (specifically 1840's onwards). As a result we see alot of member requests coming in from people who have ancestors who emmigrated to North America during 18th century. So there's somewhat of a sample bias going on.

I do think the lower P312* in the "North" category was interesting, given the fact that there was large scale population movement into the area in the last 400 years.

I should point out though that due to large migration of "Scots-Irish" in the 18th century that they have a disproportionate percentage among the diaspora community in the modern US compared to what you could class as "Native Irish" who only started emigrating in mass to US from 1820's onwards (specifically 1840's onwards). As a result we see alot of member requests coming in from people who have ancestors who emmigrated to North America during 18th century. So there's somewhat of a sample bias going on.

I do think the lower P312* in the "North" category was interesting, given the fact that there was large scale population movement into the area in the last 400 years.

-Paul(DF41+)

I'd say given the mass emigration of the Native Irish in the 1800's that their numbers are probably nearing the Scots-Irish now. Though you are absolutely correct about the Scotch-Irish creating a huge bias. You'd be hard-pressed to find an American who doesn't have at least one line of ancestry from this region.

One of the main reasons for this bias is the mis-understanding that your average American makes when the phrase "Scotch-Irish" is mentioned. All they're really hearing is Irish. Couple that with the popularity of being Irish and you get alot of ignorance and confusion. There really should be a specific project for those of this background. Because as I'm going through the Irish y-dna project, I'm seeing many, many non-gaelic surnames. Or Scots-Gaelic as opposed to Irish-Gaelic.

There's at least one carrying the "O'Neill Variety" signature who is DF27+ in the Ireland project. This is: 179484 (McCain), he is a GD of 6 @67 markers from Neal (68848), who the Ireland project had sponsored for Z196 (came back Z196-)

When I mentioned about an NPE it's to do with idea that the Ó Néill family genealogy in the 12th century has bee contested for awhile. They had basically been deposed from the Kingship and suffer heavily losses in Battle. They then spent 140 years in the "wilderness" without access to Kingship of Northern Uí Néill. Some genealogists have historically challenged the number of generations reported for the Ó Néill main lineage during this period.

In this case the Uí Néill were a large dynastical grouping claiming desent from "Niall Noígíallach" (Niall na Naoi nGiallach) eg. Niall of the Nine Hostages. The Uí Néill had two main dynastical branches these been the Northern and Southern Uí Néill. Each of which were divided into multiple kindreds (Cineál / O.Irish=cenél).

In the case of the Northern Uí Néill the two main kindres were the Cenél Chonaill (of Tír Chonaill eg. Donegal) and the Cenél nEoghain (of Tír Eoghain eg. Tyrone).

Anyways the Ó Néill family/surname are of the Cenél nEoghain, they are named after "Niall Glúndubh mac Aodha", king of Ireland 916-919AD. His grandson was Domnall ua Néill (ua = Old/middle Irish for Ó), the first to bear the surname.

Traditionally the Uí Néill had held the "high kingship" in period before the 11th century. The operated on a system of rotation. The kingship would rotate between North and South on each succession eg."Northern King" -> "Southern King" -> "Northern King" -> "Southern King" etc.

Originally you would have probably also see "rotation" within the dynasties as to which kindred held the kingship. However by later period in the North anyways the Cenél nEoghain had excluded the Cenél Chonaill form the kingship of Aileach (An Tuasiceart eg. The North).

Wasn't Ailleach in Inishowen an O'Neill kingdon? And is Inishowen and Tyrone named after the same person?

Aileach is one of the names for the "Northern Uí Néill" kingdom. The other name is "An Tuaisceart" (The North). At this stage the province/kingdom of Ulster had been reduced to basically Antrim/Down and parts of Armagh. The Uí Néill thus didn't regard themselves as been in Ulster.

The Cenél nEoghain were originally situated in Inishowen (The island of Eoghan), they then proceed to spread outwards conquoring Derry and Tyrone. When the O'Neill family was depossed from the Kingship they were supplanted by their near relatives the MacLochlainn who were based in Inishowen. They basically disapear for close on 140 years having relatively minor mentions, by time theire is an O'Neill challenger for kingship he is based in South-East Tyrone. After the MacLochlainn's are finally nearly annihialated the center of power in switches to this new locus. Thus by end of 13th century Inishowen was allowed to fall to hands of the O'Doherty's who were of course from the Cenél Chonaill.

The more I think about it, the more I am inclined to test with Dr. Wilson's firm in Britain. FTDNA doesn't recognize DF27 and most of the branches underneath. I think I might send them an email and ask some questions about what they know about DF27, and in my case the North/South cluster as it pertains to Britain.

The more I think about it, the more I am inclined to test with Dr. Wilson's firm in Britain. FTDNA doesn't recognize DF27 and most of the branches underneath.

That way lies madness.

FTDNA (if you mean Thos. Krahn and his lab folks) knows about DF27. The automated system that prints certificates, draws maps with pushpins, etc. probably still doesn't. On the other hand if you test with Scotland's DNA it will tell you less, while costing you more; and although Dr. Wilson himself seems quite competent as a scientist, his firm apparently carries a lot of baggage in the person of a spokesman who gets on TV and whatnot, talking about genetic processes that he doesn't appear to understand very well.

Note that I used two forms of "appear" in the previous sentence. It's an inference one draws while reading the blogs of people trapped on that island who watch BBC TV. It also appears that this spokesman is litigious, so far be it from me to name him.

The more I think about it, the more I am inclined to test with Dr. Wilson's firm in Britain. FTDNA doesn't recognize DF27 and most of the branches underneath.

That way lies madness.

FTDNA (if you mean Thos. Krahn and his lab folks) knows about DF27. The automated system that prints certificates, draws maps with pushpins, etc. probably still doesn't. On the other hand if you test with Scotland's DNA it will tell you less, while costing you more; and although Dr. Wilson himself seems quite competent as a scientist, his firm apparently carries a lot of baggage in the person of a spokesman who gets on TV and whatnot, talking about genetic processes that he doesn't appear to understand very well.

Note that I used two forms of "appear" in the previous sentence. It's an inference one draws while reading the blogs of people trapped on that island who watch BBC TV. It also appears that this spokesman is litigious, so far be it from me to name him.

I hear you. They have a new book getting ready to come out about Britains DNA. I'm starting to get impatient and irritated. I've been told on another forum that DF27 on the continent is Iberian, but in isles it is probably Scandanavian. I guess the 20% unknown P312 in the busby study in north wales must be Scandanavian. And when I point out that you could use the north/ south cluster's subclades as a timeline to put them at specific places at specific times I'm told that we don't know that the though the basque carry m153 it might not have originated there because there was some m153 found in Norway. It's funny though that when I point out that m222 has been found in Germany, then it must be German the same thought process as m153 doesn't apply.

I hear you. They have a new book getting ready to come out about Britains DNA. I'm starting to get impatient and irritated. I've been told on another forum that DF27 on the continent is Iberian, but in isles it is probably Scandanavian. I guess the 20% unknown P312 in the busby study in north wales must be Scandanavian. And when I point out that you could use the north/ south cluster's subclades as a timeline to put them at specific places at specific times I'm told that we don't know that the though the basque carry m153 it might not have originated there because there was some m153 found in Norway. It's funny though that when I point out that m222 has been found in Germany, then it must be German the same thought process as m153 doesn't apply.

That is madness. I fail to see the logic why if M153 could originate from some place else besides Basque Country means that M222 has to originate in Germany. Who is saying that? Both SNPs can be found in multiple countries with people who think their families are of those countries'. I'm not sure how an appearance in any particular country is good evidence of origination there.

Given ancient DNA might not be available for where you need it, you might try evaluating both STR and related SNP diversity. The appearance of earlier branching brothers and cousins in a particular location might help on family determination, or at least the path back in time. Of course, all of that should be taken in context of historical information and archaeological information on the movements of people.

I hear you. They have a new book getting ready to come out about Britains DNA. I'm starting to get impatient and irritated. I've been told on another forum that DF27 on the continent is Iberian, but in isles it is probably Scandanavian. I guess the 20% unknown P312 in the busby study in north wales must be Scandanavian. And when I point out that you could use the north/ south cluster's subclades as a timeline to put them at specific places at specific times I'm told that we don't know that the though the basque carry m153 it might not have originated there because there was some m153 found in Norway. It's funny though that when I point out that m222 has been found in Germany, then it must be German the same thought process as m153 doesn't apply.

That is madness. I fail to see the logic why if M153 could originate from some place else besides Basque Country means that M222 has to originate in Germany. Who is saying that? Both SNPs can be found in multiple countries with people who think their families are of those countries'. I'm not sure how an appearance in any particular country is good evidence of origination there.

Given ancient DNA might not be available for where you need it, you might try evaluating both STR and related SNP diversity. The appearance of earlier branching brothers and cousins in a particular location might help on family determination, or at least the path back in time. Of course, all of that should be taken in context of historical information and archaeological information on the movements of people.

Mikewww, let me try this differently. From what I have read, the consensus for the origin of M222 is in Ireland, possibly with the Ui Niall. The consensus for the origin of Irish type III is in Ireland and is associated with the O'Brians. Even though these snp's are found outside of Ireland sporatically, the consensus is still an Irish origin. Now, you have a consensus that m153 originated with the basque area of France and Spain. The next snp upstream, Z214 is found in the same vicinity, and because there are a small, smattering of m153 outside the basque region, then there's a possibility M153 originated somewhere else? Why doesn't, then that rule apply to M222 or Irish type III? In other words, is there a double standard?

This is my first post. I have a question in regard to DF27. With the name O'Neil could it be they have a connection to Scotland's Barra Hebredian MacNeil's who have a large number in their study with an L165 SNP Terminal Clade. As the MacNeil Phylogenetic Tree is DF27/S250, S355/Z196, L176.2/S179.2, L165/S68 Terminal. It was alway thought that the Barra MacNeils were of Neil of the Nine Hostages line however this was found inaccurate and just folklore when it was determined Neil of the Nine Hostages was a SNP M222. (Also the alternate branching at L176.2 goes to SRY 2627.)

Dr Wilson had thought that the L165 had come from Scandinavia however the bulk of L165 are in South Central England and the missing link to the migratory path from Iberia was that there were no L165 yet found in Ireland. Maybe this is the link as Dr Wilson has been unable to show a nordic link?

It should also be noted that their are large groups of MacDonalds and MacLeods in the Hebredes that are also L165.

I hear you. They have a new book getting ready to come out about Britains DNA. I'm starting to get impatient and irritated. I've been told on another forum that DF27 on the continent is Iberian, but in isles it is probably Scandanavian. I guess the 20% unknown P312 in the busby study in north wales must be Scandanavian. And when I point out that you could use the north/ south cluster's subclades as a timeline to put them at specific places at specific times I'm told that we don't know that the though the basque carry m153 it might not have originated there because there was some m153 found in Norway. It's funny though that when I point out that m222 has been found in Germany, then it must be German the same thought process as m153 doesn't apply.

That is madness. I fail to see the logic why if M153 could originate from some place else besides Basque Country means that M222 has to originate in Germany. Who is saying that? Both SNPs can be found in multiple countries with people who think their families are of those countries'. I'm not sure how an appearance in any particular country is good evidence of origination there.

Given ancient DNA might not be available for where you need it, you might try evaluating both STR and related SNP diversity. The appearance of earlier branching brothers and cousins in a particular location might help on family determination, or at least the path back in time. Of course, all of that should be taken in context of historical information and archaeological information on the movements of people.

No one was using that logic, the point is, that once an M153 was found outside of its usual frequency zone, it wasn't really even considered that maybe.. Just maybe, it didn't have to have a Basque origin. A couple of posts here and there mention a slight possibility, but that was it.. Well until this little discussion kicked it back up. I'm not saying you didn't, Mike, you were one of the few people who actually tried to discuss this possibility when the Old Norway study was leaked. The general consesus was that it wasn't really anything to look at and was probably the result of recent immigration.

Whereas when a few M222 were found outside of their usual frequency zone and the thought suddenly arises that "Hey! Maybe they had an origin in Germany and could be associated with the Halstatt culture?" Then of course there were and still are debates off and on about this.. with a few people upset that this clade may not be as "Irish" as once thought. In other words, it seemed to be given a much more thorough argument and consideration.

Billy brings up a great point regarding DF27 and how its viewed. It seems all other clades are usually open to interpratation( with the usual degree of a preferred association), but for some reason this group always falls back on the same old theories.

I hear you. They have a new book getting ready to come out about Britains DNA. I'm starting to get impatient and irritated. I've been told on another forum that DF27 on the continent is Iberian, but in isles it is probably Scandanavian. I guess the 20% unknown P312 in the busby study in north wales must be Scandanavian. And when I point out that you could use the north/ south cluster's subclades as a timeline to put them at specific places at specific times I'm told that we don't know that the though the basque carry m153 it might not have originated there because there was some m153 found in Norway. It's funny though that when I point out that m222 has been found in Germany, then it must be German the same thought process as m153 doesn't apply.

That is madness. I fail to see the logic why if M153 could originate from some place else besides Basque Country means that M222 has to originate in Germany. Who is saying that? Both SNPs can be found in multiple countries with people who think their families are of those countries'. I'm not sure how an appearance in any particular country is good evidence of origination there.

Given ancient DNA might not be available for where you need it, you might try evaluating both STR and related SNP diversity. The appearance of earlier branching brothers and cousins in a particular location might help on family determination, or at least the path back in time. Of course, all of that should be taken in context of historical information and archaeological information on the movements of people.

Mikewww, let me try this differently. From what I have read, the consensus for the origin of M222 is in Ireland, possibly with the Ui Niall. The consensus for the origin of Irish type III is in Ireland and is associated with the O'Brians. Even though these snp's are found outside of Ireland sporatically, the consensus is still an Irish origin. Now, you have a consensus that m153 originated with the basque area of France and Spain. The next snp upstream, Z214 is found in the same vicinity, and because there are a small, smattering of m153 outside the basque region, then there's a possibility M153 originated somewhere else? Why doesn't, then that rule apply to M222 or Irish type III? In other words, is there a double standard?

I don't think M222 arose in Ireland, it's older then the timeframe for Niall anyways. That and highest diversity is probably in South Scotland/North England. What's interesting is to follow the SNP trail. We see for example DF23+/M222- cluster in Wales for example.

If you read between the lines in the pseudo-history of course the ancestor of both the Uí Néill and wider Connachta led an invasion from Northern Britain.

eg. Tuathal Teachtmar arrives as a young man with an army 20 years after been force to flee in his mothers womb back to Alba (scotland but probably meaning Britain in this case). His mother supposedly been a daugther of a king of Alba as well as wife of a deposed High King.

Many have argued that what's been written in this bit of "fantasy" is a folk memory of movement from Northern Britain into Ireland.

As for Irish Type III, the general age for the cluster is on order of 1200-1300 years that and the names tied to it are generally very much tied to that of Dál gCais dynastical grouping. Which after all became important in late 10th century with Brian Boru becoming high king in 1002AD.

Either way people shouldn't be assigning nationality to Clades that are on order of 1500-2000 years ago. The concept of Nation State is very much one of the 19th century onwards.

Regarding the McNeill's and L176.2, McCain who is "O'Neill Variety" shows up as L176.2 -

With the name O'Neil could it be they have a connection to Scotland's Barra Hebredian MacNeil's who have a large number in their study with an L165 SNP Terminal Clade.

Hello Scotsman. According to Dubhtach the O'Neill Variety are Z196-, MacLeods and MacNeil (L165) are Z196+. The YDNA link between DF27+ Z196- subclades like O'Neill Variety and DF27+ Z196+ MacLeods and MacNeils would have to be a few thousand years ago.